Astrup, Thomas

Hellweg, Stefanie

Rørbech, Jakob Thaysen

Vadenbo, Carl

Online Research Database In Technology

                       General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.  • Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal   If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.     Downloaded from orbit.dtu.dk on: Dec 20, 2017Comparison of resource depletion indicators: Quantitative differences and similaritiesRørbech, Jakob Thaysen; Vadenbo, Carl; Hellweg, Stefanie; Astrup, ThomasPublication date:2014Link back to DTU OrbitCitation (APA):Rørbech, J. T., Vadenbo, C., Hellweg, S., & Astrup, T. (2014). Comparison of resource depletion indicators:Quantitative differences and similarities. Abstract from Swiss LCA Discussion Forum, Zürich, Switzerland.Abstract Title:  Comparison of resource depletion indicators: Quantitative differences and similarities  Event:  Discussion Forum on Life Cycle Assessment (No. 55)   Authors:  Jakob Rørbech, Carl Vadenbo, Stefanie Hellweg and Thomas Astrup   Concerns regarding natural resource availability and supply have been growing in recent years. Consequently, many initiatives have been taken by national and supranational organizations to develop mitigation strategies to the foreseen limits to the material consumption of the human society. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) has been used to evaluate the environmental consequences of activities within our society with the fundamental focus on damages to human health, ecosystem quality and natural resources. A broad selection of resource depletion assessment methods has been proposed for modeling the damage to natural resources; however, little consensus has been reached on a relevant safeguard object and modeling approach along the environmental mechanism.  To improve the basis for discussion, we present a quantitative comparison of major modeling approaches to assess abiotic natural resource depletion through comparison of indicator characterization factors and characterized impact scores based on impact assessment of a large inventory database of activity datasets of diverse products and services. The comparison includes the methods of CML 2001 (ultimate reserve and reserve base), EDIP 2003, Eco-indicator 99, EPS 2000, IMPACT 2002, ReCiPe 2008, Swart & Dewulf (2013), CEENE, CExD and SED.  The comparison identifies little agreement across the methods with the exception of CML (default), Eco-indicator 99, IMPACT2002+, ReCiPe, CEENE and CExD that all suggest consumption of energy resources to be the main driver for natural resource depletion.  For practitioners the choice of LCIA method for resource depletion is shown to be crucial for the outcome of the impact towards natural resources. Furthermore, most of the methods focusing on energy resource consumption have a very limited coverage of resources in their depletion models due to lack of data indicating a high risk for problem shifting towards the ones not included in the models. This emphasize the need for reaching consensus on how to proceed with resource depletion modeling in LCA with a special focus on balancing modeling complexity with resource coverage. Furthermore, clarification of the area of protection for natural resources must be obtained to ensure a coherent modeling along the environmental mechanism an avoiding double counting across other impact categories within the LCIA.   

Comparison of resource depletion indicators: Quantitative differences and similarities

http://orbit.dtu.dk/ws/files/105043148/Comparison_of_resource_depletion_indicators.pdf

Comparison of resource depletion indicators: Quantitative differences and similarities

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Online Research Database In Technology